What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Fullback - completely useless on every team? (1 Viewer)

lod01

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.

 

Hooper31

Footballguy
SEA FB John L. Wiliams. The last of a dead breed. Carries + catches = fantasy relevant along with being a blocker for his feature back.. And please, don't give me that Alstott and Centers line. Neither were fullbacks in the traditional sense of the word.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
I still maintain that one day - one day - some coach will reshape the position like what has been done with the tight end.

The thing I've noticed about really good fullbacks is that when given the chance they produce. They get the TD, they run the ball well, they catch the ball well. The good ones that is. And the fans love them. It will happen.

 

Donsmith753

Footballguy
Is Havili a full back?

He was involved a bit on Sunday

ETA:

Fair original point though as their running game is terrible.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

lod01

Footballguy
I still maintain that one day - one day - some coach will reshape the position like what has been done with the tight end.

The thing I've noticed about really good fullbacks is that when given the chance they produce. They get the TD, they run the ball well, they catch the ball well. The good ones that is. And the fans love them. It will happen.
It could be but they won't line up like the current ATL and NYG FBs where it's obviously a run...and it is a run 90% of the time. The play is such a failure it's embarrassing to watch.

 

greggorymac

Footballguy
I still maintain that one day - one day - some coach will reshape the position like what has been done with the tight end.

The thing I've noticed about really good fullbacks is that when given the chance they produce. They get the TD, they run the ball well, they catch the ball well. The good ones that is. And the fans love them. It will happen.
Kuuuuuuuuuhn!

 

Diamond

Footballguy
Frankly, I would go the other way and ask what's happened to NFL running games? Many seem mired in sub-3.0 ypc levels on a weekly basis. Perhaps it's because they've stopped using true fullbacks. Or, more likely, it's because most teams highly regard (and draft) athletic and humungous interior DTs, while at the same time sloughing the interior O-line and fullback positions. If you've got to double team the DT, the LB is going to make the play more often when there is no lead blocker.

If you're using NYG and Atlanta as your test cases. The problem isn't the fullback, it's the subpar offensive lines, IMO.

 

Late225

Footballguy
I still maintain that one day - one day - some coach will reshape the position like what has been done with the tight end.

The thing I've noticed about really good fullbacks is that when given the chance they produce. They get the TD, they run the ball well, they catch the ball well. The good ones that is. And the fans love them. It will happen
I can see someone experimenting with a double toss option. Both lines pull and the quarterback has the option of which toss play to make based on the defensive alignment or some type of read option. Two Wide receiver, one tight end set to make an even 6 man line.

In the new passing NFL, I'd also see a benefit to having a Darren Sproles or Reggie Bush-like fullback instead of the traditional fullback. I'd rather have speed and the ability to catch a pass.

 

Kool-Aid Larry

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.
james develin

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
Isn't fullback just a position, where a player is on the field?

Take Ogbannaya and play him further back and doesn't he go from fullback to halfback?

They moved the QB around, they could do the same thing with halfbacks. Heck maybe halfbacks have been playing in the fullback position, ie closer to the line, and we just haven't been calling it that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ted Mullins

Footballguy
Seems like a few of the more run heavy teams use them? 49ers, Seahawks, Skins, etc.

As mentioned already, I'd imagine the natural progression is to a more versatile type the way tight ends have evolved - someone that can run and catch some as well. This is both a better fit for the current offensive trends and makes it easier to justify the roster spot. If you watched Hard Knocks, I thought the Bengals keeping Orson Charles over Connor was a good example of this - though I haven't really watched much Bengals to see how that has played out.

 

johnadams

Footballguy
As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.
Weird. I was reading something recently about how Bruce Miller has been a major part of the SF running game.
This is true. Plus, Miller provides the occassional outlet for Kaep, trending to about 25 receptions for this year. Little help in ff, but not completely a cipher either.

No mention of Reece yet despite 100 touches and 700 yards last year. Sure, he's not a "traditional" FB, but the term "traditional" seems to exclude a pass catching or running FB anyway. I'd suggest that the FBs of yesteryear who would post big numbers (I'm thinking Harris, Craig and Riggins) wouldn't be considered FBs today though they were frequently paired with traditional TBs like Bleier, Tyler and Washington. Nowadays, we would just call it RBBC with the situational substitions that we see so frequently.

And yes, Centers and Alstott were FBs (though I'd concede a bit on Alstott).

 

simey

Footballguy
The Panthers use Tolbert to block, and he also gets some carries and catches on occasions. Baltimore's Vonta Leach also does the same.

 

ConnSKINS26

Footballguy
Frankly, I would go the other way and ask what's happened to NFL running games? Many seem mired in sub-3.0 ypc levels on a weekly basis. Perhaps it's because they've stopped using true fullbacks. Or, more likely, it's because most teams highly regard (and draft) athletic and humungous interior DTs, while at the same time sloughing the interior O-line and fullback positions. If you've got to double team the DT, the LB is going to make the play more often when there is no lead blocker.

If you're using NYG and Atlanta as your test cases. The problem isn't the fullback, it's the subpar offensive lines, IMO.
Another thing to consider, across the NFL, is the increasing popularity of the receiving TE who can't block. That's helping passing games, but probably hurting running games.

 

lod01

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.
james develin
Has that guy seen an offensive snap this year?

 

lod01

Footballguy
Frankly, I would go the other way and ask what's happened to NFL running games? Many seem mired in sub-3.0 ypc levels on a weekly basis. Perhaps it's because they've stopped using true fullbacks. Or, more likely, it's because most teams highly regard (and draft) athletic and humungous interior DTs, while at the same time sloughing the interior O-line and fullback positions. If you've got to double team the DT, the LB is going to make the play more often when there is no lead blocker.

If you're using NYG and Atlanta as your test cases. The problem isn't the fullback, it's the subpar offensive lines, IMO.
Yes, their OL's suck so I can't figure out why they think adding a FB is going to work some magic. We are almost 1/2 way thru the season and it hasn't worked yet.

 

Kool-Aid Larry

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.
james develin
Has that guy seen an offensive snap this year?
he's seen 128 of them

 

FUBAR

Footballguy
I still maintain that one day - one day - some coach will reshape the position like what has been done with the tight end.

The thing I've noticed about really good fullbacks is that when given the chance they produce. They get the TD, they run the ball well, they catch the ball well. The good ones that is. And the fans love them. It will happen.
If Oakland had a creative OC, he could be this guy. Reece has the talent.

 

Porkchop Express

Footballguy
The NFL wants to emphasize the pass, as a result teams dont emphasize the run as much making the FB less important. Also FB's are usually among the least athletic and dynamic pass catchers among eligible receivers.

 

Long Ball Larry

Footballguy
If you are talking about actual touches, then probably not. As part of the overall running game, though, vontae leach, Leonard weaver, tony Richardson, among a few others, have been strong in recent years. Certainly not widely utilized.

 
Agree with a lot in this thread. The days of the blocking fullback (epitomized by Lorenzo Neal) are long gone, as teams eschewed power run offense in favor for more versatile systems that took advantage of athleticism at all skill positions.

Jim Brown, Franco Harris, Csonka, etc. were technically fullbacks, but can't put them in the discussion here given how dominant they were as 3-down backs.

Guys like Rathman, Moose Johnston, and Allstott were just as adept at running as they were at blocking, and the balance they brought could still be utilized in today's RBBC. Others like Byers and Larry Centers indexed towards the passing game a little more, and would fit well in some of the more pass-first/option schemes.

To me, though, the most optimal model for today's game is a guy like Marcel Reece -- soft hands like a WR, can run as a solid bruiser or a fleet cruiser, great in outlets or in the flats, can run the same routes as a TE, and is a terrific blocker in the backfield.

I think it's this kind of utility player that is the best fit in today's style of play, and is very much relevant to today's offenses.

 

Xue

Footballguy
Isn't fullback just a position, where a player is on the field?

Take Ogbannaya and play him further back and doesn't he go from fullback to halfback?

They moved the QB around, they could do the same thing with halfbacks. Heck maybe halfbacks have been playing in the fullback position, ie closer to the line, and we just haven't been calling it that.
For the context of this thread, people are referring to a FB as a "lead blocker in the run game" regardless of how far they line up from the LOS.

 

solorca

Footballguy
Mike Tolbert is a big part of the Panthers, not just as a blocker, but as a runner and receiver out of the backfield.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
Let's give it up for Darrell Young (RG, AlMo, Helu, Garcon, Reed owners, hush).

Good fullbacks just seem to deliver when asked. After this Shan probably won't call on Young again for a long time, too bad.

 

lod01

Footballguy
Isn't fullback just a position, where a player is on the field?

Take Ogbannaya and play him further back and doesn't he go from fullback to halfback?

They moved the QB around, they could do the same thing with halfbacks. Heck maybe halfbacks have been playing in the fullback position, ie closer to the line, and we just haven't been calling it that.
For the context of this thread, people are referring to a FB as a "lead blocker in the run game" regardless of how far they line up from the LOS.
That's what I was referring to as the topic. It's brutal watching ATL and NYG among others line up at the 50 yard line or so on 2nd and 9 and consistently get 1 yard or less 3 times or more a game, week after week. I have no idea why they think it will work even after 8 weeks of failures.

 

solorca

Footballguy
Worth noting that Tolbert scored again this week, making it four straight weeks. He's been fantastic as a runner and receiver out of the backfield, and may be one of the most important pieces of the Carolina offense (although his stats don't quite suggest just how useful he's been).

 

fatness

against the grain
Warrior said:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Let's give it up for Darrell Young (RG, AlMo, Helu, Garcon, Reed owners, hush).

Good fullbacks just seem to deliver when asked. After this Shan probably won't call on Young again for a long time, too bad.
Great player on special teams, too.
And in the locker room. Very well liked and respected by teammates.

5/12/3

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
For what it's worth the fullback Jed Collins played heavily in all of Mark Ingram's big runs vs Dallas.

The Saints ran out of the I a lot actually.

 

zftcg

Footballguy
Can't remember who it was (Lorenzo Neal?) but there was a FB a few years ago who bounced around to a few different teams and dramatically improved the stats of the team's tailback in every situation. It was seriously night and day -- the guy shows up, and all of a sudden the RB is a Pro Bowler.

I think Vontae Leach had that rep as well (Foster, Rice), although the Ravens aren't doing much for his legacy this year.

 

Diamond

Footballguy
Hard to blame it on Leach when they barely use him.

From KFFL:

The Baltimore Ravens have used three-wide receiver sets more this year than last, when they used the formation on 43 percent of their snaps in 2012. They've used three receivers even more in the last two games, too. The Ravens have used three-wide sets on 63.6 percent of their offensive plays this season. FB Vontae Leach has suffered, as he's seen just 14 snaps in the last two contests. They're using two running backs on only 17.9 percent of their plays this year, compared to 40 percent last season. Three-receiver sets are likely to continue to remain a big part of the team's game plan on a week-to-week basis.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

zftcg

Footballguy
Hard to blame it on Leach when they barely use him.

From KFFL:

The Baltimore Ravens have used three-wide receiver sets more this year than last, when they used the formation on 43 percent of their snaps in 2012. They've used three receivers even more in the last two games, too. The Ravens have used three-wide sets on 63.6 percent of their offensive plays this season. FB Vontae Leach has suffered, as he's seen just 14 snaps in the last two contests. They're using two running backs on only 17.9 percent of their plays this year, compared to 40 percent last season. Three-receiver sets are likely to continue to remain a big part of the team's game plan on a week-to-week basis.
That would make sense. I also get the sense Leach may be slowing down. If a guy's that valuable to your running game, you don't release him in the offseason and hope that he comes back to you. And the fact that he found no interest in the free-agent market indicates the rest of the league wasn't that impressed with him either.

 

Warrior

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.
Was utilized the FB a few weeks ago. I think he had 3 TDs.

 

lod01

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.
Was utilized the FB a few weeks ago. I think he had 3 TDs.
As a running back.

 

SaintsInDome2006

Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006 said:
TD by Jed Collins.

Long catch and run TD by Darrell Young.
Totally different usage of what I am talking about.
LOD, apologies, I know/knew that - and that's interesting to me, Jed Collins is interesting to watch here, they use him to great effect in the blocking game and the Saints obviously like his versatility when he is on the field. I know it seems like the FB comes in (maybe for most teams) it's a run, plain and simple, ineffective typically, but considering that Collins is a primary pass blocker, they're not afraid to run him or throw to him, especially at the goal line, and the fact that he is so good at blocking (basically, they seem to run him in a zone scheme blowing out holes for Pierre & Ingram a good bit), it really does make his presence useful. They have one active FB, it's him, and they're not into useless offensive players around here.

But I liked this as a FB discussion thread, the usage in general is up for discussion I hope. Frankly I think it's all related.

Somebody mentioned the H-back, I really don't see why some of these guys couldn't be (almost) as good as Riggins (who Gibbs used in the H-back), or at least effective in the offense, if given the chance.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

lod01

Footballguy
The Saints know how and when to use their FB. On the flip side these players are totally useless on the Giants and Falcons. The Giants run better out of a single back set with Brown. The Falcons should just give up trying to run or maybe this Smith guy is useful. Jackson is toast that much we do know.

I'm just baffled that these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in a 1970's I formation at the 50 yard line and thing it is going to work.

 

Kool-Aid Larry

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.
james develin
booyah!

2014 edit: I don't remember, but I think develin had just scored a td right then

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kool-Aid Larry

Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:

cstu

Footballguy
Watching NYG and ATL a lot since Gomer and Matt Ryan are my fantasy QBs. Every time these 2 teams trot out a FB and line up in the I formation the result is a max of 3 yards gained. It never works. So in todays NFL what possesses these OC's to still think there is a place in the playbook for this play? I'll guarantee the average gain for both these 2 teams is less than 3 yards. Why would you put your offense in a situation of 3rd and long 3-4 times a game?

I can understand lining up in short yardage with the FB trying to get that 1st down or at the GL trying for a TD. The one that kills me the most is 2nd and 8 at around the 50 and here it comes, 2 WRs, TE lined up in line, I formation. It just screams, hey we are running the ball. I fails every time for ATL.

As owner of Frank Gore, I know his best work is done with the FB standing on the sidelines.

I don't think Denver and NE even have one on the roster. Kuhn (GB) and Collins (NO) are used in mainly the passing game.
The ideal FB to me is a big, every down type back (block, receive) who isn't a good enough at running the ball.

In other words, Trent Richardson.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top